3 ms·
This is mostly unrelated to our original goals, which was reliability and performance. This wasn't to protect ourselves in the event of S3 going down, the timin
by mattrobenolt 10y ago
This is mostly unrelated to our original goals, which was reliability and performance. This wasn't to protect ourselves in the event of S3 going down, the timing just worked out that it saved us during that as well while also accomplishing the original goals.
- mattrobenolt 10y agoSorry, and by reliable, I explicitly mean, the network connection from our datacenter to halfway across the country hiccuped more than I liked and was slower than I liked. Not reliability of the service itself.
- mnutt 10y agoAh, fortuitous timing! :) If you were looking to protect yourself against S3 going down and had bigger drives, I assume you could use cron to sync the entire bucket and use `try_files` to prefer local and fall back to S3 if the file was missing?
- mattrobenolt 10y agoYeah, we could do something like this as well if we cared. We are easily caching 95+% of our active data in a small amount of disk space. It's not that valuable for us to have a complete replica of the full data set.